Case \u2116490\/95\/22 of 02\/10\/2025<\/p>\n
1. The subject matter of the dispute is the claim of PERSON_1 against the state for compensation for moral damages caused, in his opinion, by the unlawful actions of a police investigator.<\/p>\n
2. The court dismissed the claim because the plaintiff did not prove the existence of all the necessary elements for the civil liability of the state, namely: the fact of causing moral damage, the illegality of the investigator’s actions, and the causal connection between these actions and the damage caused. The court noted that the mere fact of entering information into the ERDR under a different qualification than the plaintiff expected is not automatically illegal. Also, the existence of criminal proceedings against the investigator is not conclusive evidence of his unlawful actions in a particular case. The court emphasized that the plaintiff did not provide any evidence to support that the investigator’s actions led to his mental suffering, deterioration of health, changes in life relationships, or damage to reputation. The court took into account that the plaintiff exercised his right to appeal the investigator’s actions within the criminal proceedings, which is not a basis for automatic compensation for moral damage.<\/p>\n
3. The court dismissed the cassation appeal and upheld the decision of the appellate court.<\/p>\n
Case \u2116185\/12225\/23 of 24\/09\/2025<\/p>\n
1. The subject matter of the dispute is the recognition of contracts for the sale of vehicles concluded between the defendants as invalid, since the plaintiff believes that these contracts were concluded in order to avoid the recovery of the debtor’s (one of the defendants) property under a court decision on compensation for moral damage.<\/p>\n
2. The court dismissed the claim, because, although it \u043f\u0440\u0438\u0437\u043d\u0430\u0432 \u0432\u0438\u0437\u043d\u0430\u0432 the plaintiff’s claims to be justified, it found that the plaintiff had missed the statute of limitations for applying to the court for protection of his right. The court proceeded from the fact that the plaintiff learned about the disputed sales contracts back in 2018, when she familiarized herself with the materials of the enforcement proceedings, which contained the relevant information, and applied to the court only in 2023, that is, outside the three-year statute of limitations. The court of appeal supported these conclusions, rejecting the plaintiff’s arguments that there was no information about the disputed contracts in the enforcement proceedings, since the case file contained evidence of the plaintiff’s awareness of the re-registration of vehicles. The court of cassation also agreed that the courts of previous instances fully and comprehensively established the circumstances of the case, examined all the evidence and came to a reasonable conclusion about the expiration of the statute of limitations. The court of cassation rejected the arguments of the cassation appeal, as they do not refute the conclusions of the courts of previous instances and do not give grounds to believe that the courts violated the norms of substantive and procedural law.<\/p>\n
3. The court of cassation dismissed the cassation appeal, and the decision
\nof previous instances \u2013 unchanged.<\/p>\n
**Case No. 161\/19903\/18 dated 09\/16\/2025**
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the verdict of the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court and the ruling of the Appeals Chamber of the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court regarding the conviction of PERSON_10 and PERSON_11 for embezzlement of another’s property in especially large amounts, committed by a group of persons by prior conspiracy, using their official position.<\/p>\n
2. The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeals, upholding the decisions of the courts of previous instances, as they fully and comprehensively examined the circumstances of the case, properly assessed the evidence provided by the parties, and reached a reasonable conclusion regarding the guilt of PERSON_10 and PERSON_11 in committing the crime under Part 5 of Article 191 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The court of cassation instance noted that the defenders’ arguments regarding the inadmissibility of evidence, violation of the right to defense, and incorrect application of substantive law are unfounded, since the courts of previous instances acted within their powers, complied with the requirements of the criminal procedural law, and ensured the implementation of the principles of adversarial proceedings and dispositivity. Also, the Supreme Court emphasized that it is not a court of fact and has no right to re-evaluate the evidence established by the courts of first and appellate instances. The court took into account that the appellate court re-examined the written evidence at the request of the defense, which indicates a thorough examination of the case.<\/p>\n
3. The Supreme Court ruled to leave unchanged the verdict of the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court and the ruling of the Appeals Chamber of the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court regarding PERSON_10 and PERSON_11.<\/p>\n
**Case No. 904\/4127\/23 dated 09\/30\/2025**
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition of invalidity of the decisions of the constituent and general meetings of the condominium association of an apartment building.
\n2. The decision lacks the main arguments of the court of cassation instance, as only the introductory and operative parts of the resolution are provided. Usually, when considering similar cases, the court of cassation instance checks the correctness of the application by the courts of previous instances of the norms of substantive and procedural law, in particular, regarding the procedure for convening and holding meetings of the condominium association, quorum, powers, compliance of the adopted decisions with the requirements of the law and the interests of co-owners. The circumstances regarding the observance of the rights of the plaintiff as a co-owner during the adoption of the appealed decisions are important. The court could take into account the evidence provided by the parties and evaluate it in aggregate. Also, the court could take into account the practice of the Supreme Court on similar issues.
\n3. The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal and left the appellate court’s ruling unchanged.<\/p>\n
**Case No. 442\/1002\/24 dated 09\/24\/2025**
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the establishment of the fact of cohabitation of the applicant with her brother and being dependent on her for social
\non of the death of his brother in the war.<\/p>\n
2. The court dismissed the application because the applicant did not provide sufficient evidence of cohabitation with her brother as one family, maintaining a common household, and receiving material assistance from him, which would be the main source of her livelihood. The court noted that the provided receipts and statements do not confirm that the brother’s expenses were specifically for the maintenance of his sister. It was also taken into account that the applicant’s disability was established after the death of her brother, which refutes her arguments about the need for his assistance due to disability. The court took into account that the applicant has a sister who lives nearby and helps her, and there is no evidence of the impossibility of her employment before the establishment of disability. The court emphasized that the establishment of the fact of cohabitation alone does not give the right to receive payments in connection with the death of the brother.<\/p>\n
3. The court of cassation upheld the decisions of the courts of previous instances without changes, and the cassation appeal without satisfaction.<\/p>\n
Case No. 910\/8275\/24 dated 09\/30\/2025<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n 1. The subject of the dispute is the recovery of expenses for professional legal assistance incurred by the defendants and a third party in connection with the cassation review of the case.<\/p>\n 2. The Supreme Court partially satisfied the applications of the defendants and the third party for the recovery of expenses for professional legal assistance, guided by the following: 3. The court ordered the recovery from the plaintiff in favor of each of the defendants and the third party partial reimbursement of expenses for professional legal assistance, namely: UAH 23,000 to each of the defendants and UAH 21,000 to the third party.<\/p>\n Case No. 346\/7451\/23 dated 09\/24\/2025<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n 1. The subject of the dispute is the deprivation of parental rights of PERSON_2 in relation to his son PERSON_3.<\/p>\n 2. The court dismissed the claim for deprivation of parental rights, because the plaintiff did not provide sufficient evidence of the defendant’s evasion of fulfilling parental responsibilities, and deprivation of parental rights 3. The court dismissed the cassation appeal and upheld the decisions of the previous instances.<\/p>\n Case No. 752\/14684\/19 dated 01\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The operative part of the decision does not contain the court’s arguments. To provide a complete answer, the full text of the ruling is required.<\/p>\n 3. The Supreme Court upheld the verdict of the Kyiv Court of Appeal and dismissed the defense counsel’s cassation appeal.<\/p>\n Case No. 303\/11639\/23 dated 02\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The appellate court, overturning the decision of the first instance court and dismissing the claim, proceeded from the fact that the mortgagee duly sent a demand to the plaintiff to remedy the violations, fulfilling the requirements of Article 35 of the Law of Ukraine “On Mortgage.” The court found that the state registrar was provided with the original mortgage agreement, a certificate of debt status, and a report on the market value of the mortgaged property at the time of acquisition of ownership. Also, the court took into account that the plaintiff did not dispute the fact of the transfer of ownership of the mortgaged property to Digi Finance LLC and did not file claims for the cancellation of the relevant decision of the state registrar. The cassation court emphasized that the purpose of notifying the mortgagor is to inform them of the mortgagee’s intention to foreclose on the mortgaged property through extrajudicial settlement. The cassation court noted that the parties to the agreement established the procedure for sending notices under this agreement, in particular the requirements provided for in Part 1 of Article 35 of the Law of Ukraine “On Mortgage,” and determined that such a demand should be considered duly made if it is carried out 3. The court of cassation upheld the cassation appeal and left the appellate court’s ruling unchanged.<\/p>\n **Case No. 621\/2596\/21 dated 09\/24\/2025** 1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition of the plaintiff’s dismissal as illegal due to staff reduction, the cancellation of the dismissal order, reinstatement to the position, and recovery of average earnings for the period of forced absence.<\/p>\n 2. The court, in dismissing the claim, proceeded from the fact that the plaintiff’s dismissal occurred in compliance with the requirements of the Labor Code of Ukraine, in particular, he was warned about the dismissal two months in advance, he was offered all available vacancies that corresponded to his experience and qualifications, which he refused. The court noted that the employer is obliged to offer the employee not all vacant positions at the enterprise, but only those that correspond to his profession, specialty, qualification, and experience. The court also took into account that the plaintiff did not prove the facts of discrimination by the management, and the decision to reduce the position falls within the competence of the enterprise management. The appellate court, reviewing the case, found that the position held by the plaintiff was not vacant at the time of the dismissal warning, since another person had already been transferred to this position.<\/p>\n 3. The court of cassation upheld the cassation appeal and left the decisions of the previous instances unchanged.<\/p>\n **Case No. 570\/5878\/21 dated 09\/24\/2025** 1. Subject of the dispute – recognition of the mortgage agreement as invalid and cancellation of the state registrar’s decisions regarding the registration of the mortgage on the land plot.<\/p>\n 2. The court of cassation agreed with the conclusions of the appellate court, which overturned the decision of the court of first instance and dismissed the claim of “Prod Meister” LLC, since “Prod Meister” LLC is not a mortgagee and does not have the right to foreclose on the subject of the mortgage, including the land plot, since the agreement on the assignment of the right of claim under the mortgage agreement, on the basis of which “Prod Meister” LLC acquired the rights of the mortgagee, was declared invalid. The court took into account that the decision of the Supreme Court in case No. 569\/22011\/18, which declared the agreement on the assignment of the right of claim invalid, was adopted after the decision of the court of first instance, and this circumstance is newly discovered, since its existence became known only after the decision of the court of first instance. The court also noted that since the transaction is declared invalid from the moment of its conclusion, “Prod Meister” LLC did not acquire any rights under the invalid agreement on the assignment of the right of claim, including the rights of the mortgagee. The court rejected the arguments of the cassation appeal that the circumstances cited by the applicant are not newly discovered and are not essential for the correct resolution of the case.<\/p>\n 3. The court dismissed the cassation appeal of “Prod Meister” LLC. **Case No. 758\/13495\/24 dated 10\/01\/2025** 2. The Supreme Court partially satisfied the prosecutor’s cassation appeal, overturning the ruling of the Kyiv Court of Appeal and ordering a new trial in the appellate instance; however, the reasons for such a decision are not specified in the operative part. Since the full text of the ruling will be drafted later, it is currently impossible to establish the specific arguments that the Supreme Court relied on when making this decision. Typically, such decisions may be related to violations of procedural law, incomplete investigation of evidence, or incorrect application of substantive law by the appellate court. For a more accurate analysis, it is necessary to wait for the full text of the ruling.<\/p>\n 3. The Supreme Court overturned the ruling of the Kyiv Court of Appeal regarding PERSON_6 and ordered a new trial in the court of appellate instance.<\/p>\n **Case No. 400\/4172\/22 dated 10\/01\/2025** 2. The Supreme Court, overturning the decision of the appellate court, emphasized that business transactions must be actually carried out and confirmed by proper primary documents. The court noted that the appellate court took a formal approach to the evaluation of evidence, failing to refute the well-founded conclusions of the court of first instance that the business transactions between the enterprise and the logistics company were actually carried out and had a business purpose aimed at generating profit. The court emphasized that the absence of detail in the performed work acts is not an unconditional basis for recognizing transactions as unreal if the essence of the services is disclosed in the contracts. The court also took into account that the involvement of the logistics company was due to the requirements of the counterparty (ATB-MARKET LLC) and the enterprise’s lack of direct access to distribution centers. In addition, the court noted that the tax authority did not prove the use of the disputed services outside the scope of the enterprise’s business activities.<\/p>\n 3. The court decided to satisfy the cassation appeal, overturn the ruling of the appellate court, and uphold the decision of the court of first instance, which recognized the tax notices-decisions as unlawful and canceled them.<\/p>\n **Case No. 420\/11126\/22 dated 10\/02\/2025** 2. The court of cassation established that the courts of previous instances erroneously applied Article 117 of the Labor Code of Ukraine, failing to consider the changes in the wording of this article, which came into force on July 19, 2022. The court noted that it is necessary to distinguish between the periods of payment delay before and after this date, applying the corresponding wording of Article 117 of the Labor Code of Ukraine for each period. In particular, before July 19, 2022, the wording without limiting the period for payment of average earnings was in effect, and the principle of proportionality could be applied to this period when determining the amount of payment. After July 19, 2022, the wording with a limitation of payment of average earnings to six months is in effect, and the principle of proportionality does not apply to this period. The court also took into account the conclusions of the Judicial Chamber of the Cassation Administrative Court regarding the application of Article 117 of the Labor Code of Ukraine and the impossibility of applying the principle of proportionality to legal relations regulated by the new wording of this article.<\/p>\n 3. The Supreme Court overturned the appellate court’s ruling and sent the case for a new hearing to the appellate court.<\/p>\n Case No. 683\/1775\/21 dated 02\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n 1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal of the verdict and ruling regarding the conviction of a person for intentional grievous bodily harm resulting in the death of the victim.<\/p>\n 2. The court of cassation upheld the verdict, emphasizing that its powers are limited to verifying the correct application of legal norms by lower courts, and not to re-evaluating evidence. The court noted that the conclusion about the person’s guilt is based on a combination of evidence that was properly investigated and evaluated by the courts of previous instances, including witness testimonies, expert opinions, and other case materials. The court also rejected the defense’s arguments regarding violations of the accused’s procedural rights, indicating that these arguments either were not confirmed or did not have a significant impact on the legality of the court decisions. In addition, the court supported the decision to impose the maximum punishment, considering the severity of the crime, recidivism, and other aggravating circumstances. The court of cassation emphasized that the imposed punishment is necessary and sufficient for the correction of the convicted person and the prevention of new crimes.<\/p>\n 3. The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal and upheld the verdict and ruling of the lower courts.<\/p>\n Case No. 910\/19501\/23 dated 30\/09\/2025<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n 1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition of the invalidity of the agreement on the satisfaction of the mortgagee’s claims and the cancellation of the decision on state registration of rights to real estate.<\/p>\n 2. The Supreme Court supported the decision of the appellate court, which recognized the agreement on the satisfaction of the mortgagee’s claims as invalid. The court noted that “Soyuzafrithat “\u0412\u0435\u0441\u0442\u0430 \u0413\u0440\u0443\u043f” [Vesta Group], when entering into an agreement on satisfaction of the mortgagee’s claims, did not have the full scope of rights to claim under the loan agreement secured by the mortgage, since part of the obligations was fulfilled by the guarantor, to whom the right of claim passed. In addition, the court took into account that at the time of conclusion of the disputed agreement, proceedings had already been initiated on the claim of the subsequent mortgagee (PERSON_1) for foreclosure on the subject of the mortgage, which violates the procedure established by Article 13 of the Law of Ukraine “On Mortgage” for the actions of the previous mortgagee. The court also emphasized that satisfaction of the claims would allow the return of the mortgage item to the ownership of the proper mortgagor, which would restore the rights of the previous and subsequent mortgagees to foreclose on the mortgage item in court. The court of cassation rejected the arguments of the appellants that the court of appeal did not take into account the conclusions of the Supreme Court set forth in other cases, since the actual circumstances in those cases are not similar to the circumstances of this case.<\/p>\n 3. The court dismissed the cassation appeals and upheld the decision of the court of appeal.<\/p>\n Case No. 120\/8599\/24 dated 02\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The Supreme Court agreed with the decision of the appellate court, noting that the military unit missed the deadline for appeal, and the reasons for the omission are not valid. The court emphasized that the obligation to pay court fees is established by law, and the lack of funds from a subject of power is not an objective reason for renewing the term. Also, the court noted that the military unit did not provide evidence of timely actions to remedy the deficiencies of the complaint regarding the payment of court fees. The court emphasized that government authorities must act in a timely manner and not allow delays. The military unit’s reference to the lack of funding from the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine was not taken into account by the court, as the provided letter concerned another issue.<\/p>\n 3. The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal and upheld the ruling of the appellate court.<\/p>\n Case No. 359\/10546\/23 dated 03\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The Supreme Court, when considering the application for an additional decision regarding the reimbursement of expenses for legal assistance, was guided by the following arguments: 3. The court upheld the appeal and granted the claim.<\/p>\n Case No. 759\/8143\/23 dated 01\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The court of cassation noted that the arguments of the cassation appeal do not provide sufficient grounds for concluding that the lower courts erroneously applied the norms of substantive or procedural law, which led to the adoption of an unlawful court decision. The court also pointed out that, in accordance with Part 1 of Article 400 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine, when reviewing court decisions in cassation proceedings, the court is limited by the grounds of the cassation appeal. The court does not establish or consider circumstances that were not established by the court of first instance or appellate court, nor does it resolve issues of the credibility or lack of credibility of evidence.<\/p>\n 3. The court dismissed the cassation appeal.<\/p>\n Case No. 910\/17523\/23 dated 01\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. When resolving the dispute, the court considered the requirements of the Law of Ukraine “On Limited and Additional Liability Companies” and the articles of association of the company. The specific arguments and factual circumstances of the case, unfortunately, cannot be established, as only the introductory and operative parts of the ruling are provided. For a full analysis, the full text of the court decision is needed.<\/p>\n 3. The court dismissed the cassation appeal.<\/p>\n Case No. 910\/14812\/22 dated 01\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The court rejected the cassation appeal, indicating that the arguments of the cassation appeal are similar to those already considered by the appellate court and were rejected as unfounded. The court emphasized that the cassation appeal does not present any new arguments or evidence that would refute the conclusions of the appellate court.<\/p>\n 3. The court dismissed the cassation appeal and upheld the decision of the appellate court.<\/p>\n Case No. 369\/12248\/20 dated 01\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The court took into account that the plaintiff, as the heir, actually accepted the inheritance by residing in the inherited property and taking care of it. The court also considered the absence of other heirs who would dispute the plaintiff’s right to inherit.<\/p>\n The court also considered the issue of reimbursement of expenses for legal assistance, clarifying the following:<\/p>\n * The party claiming reimbursement of expenses for legal assistance must provide evidence confirming the scope of services provided, work performed, and their cost. 3. The court partially granted the application of PrJSC “DTEK Kyiv Electric Grids” and recovered UAH 3,000 from PERSON_1 as reimbursement of expenses for legal assistance incurred in the court of cassation.<\/p>\n Case No. 400\/4172\/22 dated 01\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The Supreme Court granted the cassation appeal of Pervomaisky Milk Canning Plant LLC, overturned the ruling of the appellate court, and upheld the decision of the court of first instance. The actual circumstances of the case and the specific arguments of the court, unfortunately, cannot be established, as only the introductory and operative parts of the ruling are provided. A full analysis requires the full text of the court decision. However, based on the operative part, it can be assumed that the court of cassation agreed with the plaintiff’s arguments regarding the illegality of the tax assessment notices issued by the tax authority. The court also decided to recover from the Main Department of the State Tax Service in the Mykolaiv Region in favor of Pervomaisky Milk Canning Plant LLC court costs related to the payment of the court fee for filing the cassation appeal.<\/p>\n 3. The court decided to grant the cassation appeal of Pervomaisky Milk Canning Plant LLC, overturn the ruling of the appellate court, and uphold the decision of the court of first instance, as well as to recover court costs in favor of the plaintiff.<\/p>\n Case No. 340\/4023\/24 dated 01\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. Unfortunately, the provided text does not contain the main arguments of the court, which it used in making the decision. Therefore, I cannot describe them.<\/p>\n 3. The court dismissed the cassation appeal of the Main Department of the State Tax Service in the Kirovohrad Region and left the decisions of the previous instances unchanged.<\/p>\n Case No. 671\/931\/24 dated 03\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The court of appeal, in granting the claim, proceeded from the fact 2. The court of cassation upheld the decision of the appellate court to satisfy the claim and recover from the Main Department of the Pension Fund of Ukraine in Khmelnytskyi region in favor of the plaintiff the accrued and unreceived pension by way of inheritance.<\/p>\n **Case No. 910\/17910\/23 dated 09\/24\/2025**<\/p>\n 1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the decision of the Kyiv City Council on the transfer of a land plot for lease to LLC “Smart-Development” for construction, as well as the appeal against the lease agreement and the decision on state registration of the lease right.<\/p>\n 2. The court of cassation, overturning the decision of the appellate court, noted that the appellate court incorrectly applied the norms of procedural law regarding the jurisdiction of the dispute, without taking into account the conclusions of the Supreme Court in similar cases. The court indicated that in this case, the dispute concerns private law relations, since the subject of the claim is the challenge to the right to a land plot, and not public law control over compliance with environmental protection legislation. It is important that the public organization, according to its charter, has the right to protect the environmental rights and interests of members of the organization and other persons. The court also emphasized that the closing of proceedings in the case was premature, since the appellate court did not examine the issue of the existence of a violated right in the public organization, for the protection of which it applied to the court. The court of cassation emphasized that everyone has the right to have his case considered in a court within whose jurisdiction it is assigned by law.<\/p>\n 3. The court of cassation overturned the decision of the appellate court to close proceedings in the case and sent the case to the appellate court for continued consideration.<\/p>\n **Case No. 462\/6940\/24 dated 10\/02\/2025**<\/p>\n 1. The subject of the dispute 2. The Supreme Court, upholding the decisions of the courts of previous instances, was guided by the following. For compensation of damage caused by a state authority, the presence of three conditions is necessary: \u200b\u200bunlawful actions of the authority, the existence of damage, and a causal link between the actions and the damage. The plaintiff did not prove the fact that he suffered moral damage, as well as a causal connection between the court’s ruling and the negative consequences. The mere fact of the cancellation of the court ruling is not sufficient for compensation of moral damage. In addition, the court cannot be a defendant in a civil case, since the law establishes the court’s immunity, and the state is liable for damages caused by the court.<\/p>\n 3. The court of cassation instance dismissed the cassation appeal of PERSON_1 and upheld the decisions of the courts of previous instances.<\/p>\n Case No. 910\/1476\/25 dated 01\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The court, refusing to satisfy the prosecutor’s claim, proceeded from the fact that there is a real estate object belonging to the defendant on the disputed land plot, and therefore the transfer of the plot for lease without land auctions is lawful in accordance with the Land Code of Ukraine. The court noted that the prosecutor did not prove that the size of the land plot transferred for lease is excessive for the maintenance of real estate, and also did not provide evidence that the defendant is carrying out new construction on this plot. The court also took into account that the defendant received a permit for the construction of the object back in 1996, and the prosecutor had previously applied to the court with a claim to demolish the illegally occupied land plot, but withdrew the claim. The court emphasized that the prosecutor did not prove the illegality of the state registration of the defendant’s ownership of the disputed real estate object.<\/p>\n 3. The court dismissed the prosecutor’s cassation appeal and upheld the decisions of the courts of previous instances.<\/p>\n Case No. 902\/54\/25 dated 01\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The court of cassation instance agreed with the decision of the appellate court, which declared the additional agreement invalid, since Sole Proprietor Shevchuk V.M. did not provide proper evidence of price fluctuations in the market, which was a necessary condition for changing the essential terms of the procurement contract. The court noted that the Council rightfully acts as the plaintiff, since it is the founder of the lyceum, controls the use of budget funds, and the prosecutor complied with the procedure for representing interests. 3. The court dismissed the cassation appeal, and the decision of the appellate court remained unchanged.<\/p>\n Case No. 160\/25277\/24 dated 01\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n 1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the tax assessment notice issued by the Eastern Interregional Department of the State Tax Service for work with large taxpayers regarding the Joint-Stock Company “Kryvyi Rih Iron Ore Combine”.<\/p>\n 2. Unfortunately, the provided text lacks the main arguments of the court that it relied on when making the decision. To provide a complete answer, the full text of the court decision is required.<\/p>\n 3. The court decided to dismiss the cassation appeal of the Joint-Stock Company “Kryvyi Rih Iron Ore Combine”, and the decisions of the previous instance courts remained unchanged.<\/p>\n Case No. 320\/34853\/23 dated 01\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n The subject of the dispute in this case is the appeal by TDV (Limited Liability Company) “Uzynskyi Sugar Combine” against the tax assessment notices issued by the Main Department of the State Tax Service in the Kyiv region.<\/p>\n The Supreme Court, leaving unchanged the decisions of the previous instance courts, supported the position of TDV “Uzynskyi Sugar Combine”. The court presumably agreed that the tax assessment notices were issued in violation of the norms of tax legislation or without sufficient grounds. The plaintiff’s arguments regarding the illegality of the tax authority’s actions, the unproven nature of violations of tax legislation, or the incorrect application of legal norms may have been taken into account. Also, the court could have taken into account procedural violations committed by the tax authority during the issuance of the appealed decisions. It is important that the court of cassation instance confirmed the legality and validity of the decisions of the first and appellate instance courts, which indicates the consistency of judicial practice in this case.<\/p>\n The court ruled to dismiss the cassation appeal of the Main Department of the State Tax Service in the Kyiv region, and the decisions of the previous instance courts remained unchanged.<\/p>\n Case No. 360\/1146\/23 dated 02\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n 1. Subject of the dispute – appealing the inaction of the military unit regarding the failure to accrue and pay additional monetary remuneration to a serviceman in the amount of up to UAH 100,000 for participation in combat operations.<\/p>\n 2. The court of cassation instance overturned the decisions of the previous instance courts, as they did not establish important circumstances necessary for the correct resolution of the case. In particular, the courts did not clarify whether the territory where the plaintiff served was included in the ra 3. The court overturned the decisions of the previous instances and sent the case for a new trial to the court of first instance.<\/p>\n Case No. 420\/20518\/23 dated 02\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The court of cassation agreed with the decisions of the courts of previous instances, which rejected the serviceman’s claim, motivating it by the fact that the Minister of Defense of Ukraine has the authority to determine the procedure and conditions for the payment of additional remuneration, and a separate instruction of the minister, which provides for the deprivation of remuneration for being on duty in a state of alcohol intoxication, is lawful. The court noted that although individual decisions of the Minister of Defense of Ukraine were subject to mandatory state registration, the absence of such registration does not change their legal force, considering the conditions under which these decisions were made and actually implemented. The court also took into account that the plaintiff did not dispute the fact of being on military service in a state of alcohol intoxication, which is the basis for the deprivation of additional remuneration in accordance with a separate instruction of the Minister of Defense. The court emphasized that the additional remuneration established by Resolution No. 168 is a component of monetary allowance, but its payment is regulated by separate conditions determined by the Minister of Defense.<\/p>\n 3. The court dismissed the cassation appeal, and the decisions of the courts of previous instances remained unchanged.<\/p>\n Case No. 140\/14255\/23 dated 02\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The court of cassation agreed with the decisions of the previous instances, which satisfied the driver’s claim. The courts proceeded from the fact that Ukrtransbezpeka did not provide sufficient evidence that the driver at the time of the inspection was providing taxi services on a commercial basis, and not using the vehicle for his own needs. In particular, the inspection report 3. The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal and left the decisions of the previous instances unchanged.<\/p>\n Case No. 420\/6665\/25 dated 02\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The court of cassation upheld the decision of the appellate court, which refused to open appellate proceedings on the complaint of the tax authority due to the missed deadline for appeal. The court noted that the tax authority, as a subject of power, has the same procedural obligations as other parties to the case, and must strictly adhere to them. The court did not recognize technical difficulties in the operation of the “Electronic Court” system and workload as valid reasons for missing the deadline, as these circumstances were not supported by proper evidence. The court also took into account that the appeal was filed with a slight delay, but the absence of evidence of objective obstacles to the timely filing of the complaint did not provide grounds for renewing the deadline. The court emphasized that the renewal of the deadline is possible only in exceptional cases in the presence of circumstances of an objective and insurmountable nature. The court also granted the plaintiff’s request for reimbursement of expenses for professional legal assistance, as the defendant did not prove their disproportionality.<\/p>\n 3. The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal of the Main Directorate of the State Tax Service in the Odesa region and left the decision of the appellate court unchanged.<\/p>\n Case No. 460\/4580\/23 dated 02\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The court of cassation agreed with the decisions of the previous instances, which satisfied the claim of an individual entrepreneur, canceling the fine. The courts established that the plaintiff transported cargo not as a road carrier, but for his own needs, which excludes him from the requirements of the Regulation on Working Time and Rest Time of Drivers, which obliges equipping trucks with tachographs. The Supreme Court emphasized that the obligation to have a protocol of inspection and adaptation of the tachograph applies only to road carriers, and not to individuals who carry out 3. The court dismissed the cassation appeal and upheld the decisions of the courts of previous instances.<\/p>\n Case No. 420\/32668\/23 dated 02\/10\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The court of cassation agreed with the decisions of the courts of previous instances, stating that the plaintiff did not appeal the decision of the NBU on recognizing the ownership structure as non-transparent, but only the actions regarding the notification of this decision and the entry of a corresponding mark in the register. The court noted that the NBU rightfully sent a notification on recognizing the ownership structure of the insurance company as non-transparent, since the decision on this was made when the company was still under the supervision of the NBU. The court also indicated that the violation of the notification deadline is not an independent basis for recognizing the actions of the NBU and the Ministry of Justice as illegal. The court emphasized that the entry of the mark in the register is lawful, since the NBU’s decision on the non-transparency of the ownership structure remains in force. The court rejected the appellant’s arguments that after exclusion from the register of financial institutions, changes occurred in the ownership structure, since these changes were not properly \u043e\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u043b\u0435\u043d\u0456 [formalized] and do not cancel the NBU’s decision.<\/p>\n 3. The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal and upheld the decisions of the courts of previous instances.<\/p>\n Case No. 718\/1867\/23 dated 24\/09\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The court dismissed the claim, reasoning that more than a year had passed since the child’s relocation to Ukraine, and the child had adapted to the new environment. The court took into account that the child has a registered place of residence in Ukraine, attends school, is registered with a family doctor, is fluent in Ukrainian, and is attached to the mother and her family. The court also took into account episodes of domestic violence in Italy, as well as the deprivation of the mother’s parental rights in Italy. The court concluded that the return of the child to Italy could cause her psychological harm and would not be in her best interests, given her full adaptation to life in Ukraine. The court noted that separation from the mother would not contribute to the stability of the child’s social life.<\/p>\n 3. The court of cassation upheld the decision **Case No. 522\/8195\/22 dated 03\/10\/2025**<\/p>\n 1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition as invalid of the agreement on payment of equity contributions between the Servicing Cooperative “ECODOM-1” and an individual regarding the construction of a parking space.<\/p>\n 2. The court refused to satisfy the claim because the plaintiff did not prove the violation of their rights and interests that would require protection by recognizing the agreement as invalid. The court noted that at the time of the case’s consideration, the ownership of the parking space belonged to a third party, and possible future claims against the cooperative are not sufficient grounds for recognizing the agreement as invalid. The court also pointed out that the consequence of the invalidity of the agreement is restitution, which is impossible in this case since the property already belongs to a third party, and returning to the previous state will not restore the plaintiff’s rights. Additionally, the courts of previous instances examined all the evidence available in the case in their entirety and comparison, gave them a proper assessment, correctly determined the nature of the disputed legal relations and the rules of law that were to be applied to these legal relations. The court of cassation agreed with the conclusions of the courts of the first and appellate instances, noting that they do not contradict the conclusions of the Supreme Court, which are referenced in the cassation appeal.<\/p>\n 3. The court ruled to dismiss the cassation appeal, and to leave the decisions of the previous instance courts unchanged.<\/p>\n **Case No. 755\/16634\/21 dated 24\/09\/2025**<\/p>\n 1. The subject of the dispute is the protection of honor, dignity, business reputation, and refutation of false information disseminated by the defendants.<\/p>\n 2. The court of cassation, overturning the decision of the appellate court, proceeded from the fact that the plaintiff is a public figure, since he himself stated in the statement of claim about his sports achievements and professional activities. In this regard, the limits of permissible criticism regarding him are wider than for an ordinary person. The court also took into account that the journalist covered events of public importance, namely the purchase of sports equipment for Olympians at the expense of state funds. The court noted that the disputed statements are value judgments, not factual assertions, and do not contain accusations of the plaintiff violating the law. The court emphasized that current legislation does not provide for liability for expressing value judgments. In addition, the court indicated that the appellate court did not take into account the context of the entire publication, but extracted individual sentences.<\/p>\n 3. The Supreme Court overturned the ruling of the appellate court and upheld the decision of the court of first instance to dismiss the claim.<\/p>\n **Case No. 760\/5680\/25 dated 02\/10\/2025**<\/p>\n 1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the order of dismissal of the director of the State Enterprise “Defense Procurement Agency” and reinstatement insadi, as well as recovery of average earnings for the period of forced absence from work.<\/p>\n 2. The court of cassation upheld the decision of the appellate court, which overturned the ruling of the court of first instance to close the proceedings in the case. The appellate court correctly took into account that, according to the norms of civil procedure, disputes are subject to consideration in which the plaintiff challenges the legality of the termination of his employment contract on the grounds provided for by the Labor Code of Ukraine, with the exception of termination under paragraph 5 of part one of Article 41 of the Labor Code of Ukraine (termination of powers). In this case, the plaintiff challenges the dismissal under paragraph 2 of part one of Article 36 of the Labor Code of Ukraine (expiration of the term of the employment contract), and not under paragraph 5 of part one of Article 41 of the Labor Code of Ukraine, therefore, the dispute must be considered in the order of civil procedure. The court also took into account the previous conclusions of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court regarding the delimitation of jurisdictions in disputes over the dismissal of heads of legal entities. The arguments of the cassation appeal that the dispute is corporate were rejected, since dismissal on the basis of paragraph 2 of part one of Article 36 of the Labor Code of Ukraine does not change the jurisdiction.<\/p>\n 3. The court decided to leave the cassation appeal of the State Enterprise of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine “Defense Procurement Agency” without satisfaction, and the resolution of the Kyiv Court of Appeal \u2013 without changes.<\/p>\n
\n * The court took into account that the parties to the case have the right to legal assistance, and the expenses for such assistance are subject to distribution between the parties.
\n * The amount of expenses for legal assistance must be confirmed by relevant evidence (contracts, acts of completed works).
\n * The court assessed the proportionality of the expenses for legal assistance with the complexity of the case, the scope of services provided, the time spent, and the significance of the case for the party.
\n * The court refused to reimburse expenses that were not properly justified or were excessive, in particular, expenses for services that were not mandatory or duplicated other services.
\n * The court took into account the behavior of the parties during the consideration of the case, in particular, whether it led to the delay of the process.
\n * The court reduced the amount of expenses for professional legal assistance, taking into account the plaintiff’s petition regarding their disproportionateness and its own assessment of the validity of these expenses.<\/p>\n
\ndeprivation of parental rights is an extreme measure that is applied only in cases of culpable behavior of parents and the impossibility of changing their attitude to raising a child. The court took into account that the defendant objected to being deprived of parental rights, which may indicate his interest in the child. The court also noted that the conclusion of the guardianship authority is not sufficiently substantiated, as it does not contain information about the defendant’s deliberate neglect of his duties or the existence of a threat to the child. The court took into account the provisions of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, emphasizing the importance of preserving family ties if it is in the best interests of the child. The court also noted that the equality of parental rights is derived from the rights and interests of the child to harmonious development and proper upbringing.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the appellate court’s verdict regarding the conviction of PERSON_7 under Part 2 of Article 286 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (violation of traffic safety rules that resulted in the death of the victim).<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the cancellation of the state registrar’s decision on the registration of ownership of a house by Digi Finance LLC, which acquired ownership of the mortgaged property in an extrajudicial procedure.<\/p>\n
\nin writing and sent by registered mail.<\/p>\n
\n[https:\/\/reyestr.court.gov.ua\/Review\/130683479](https:\/\/reyestr.court.gov.ua\/Review\/130683479)<\/p>\n
\n[https:\/\/reyestr.court.gov.ua\/Review\/130683478](https:\/\/reyestr.court.gov.ua\/Review\/130683478)<\/p>\n
\nwithout satisfaction, and the appellate court’s ruling \u2013 without changes.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the prosecutor’s cassation appeal against the ruling of the Kyiv Court of Appeal regarding the convicted PERSON_6, accused of committing a criminal offense under Part 1 of Article 121 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (grievous bodily harm).<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against tax notices-decisions, by which the enterprise’s tax liabilities for income tax and VAT were increased, and penalties were applied due to the allegedly unlawful inclusion of VAT amounts in the tax credit for transactions with a logistics company.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the
\nRegarding the Odessa Regional Prosecutor’s Office’s actions concerning the untimely settlement upon dismissal and the obligation to accrue and pay average earnings for the delay period.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal by the military unit against the ruling of the appellate court refusing to open appellate proceedings due to missing the deadline for appeal.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the reimbursement of expenses for professional legal assistance incurred by PrJSC “DTEK Kyiv Electric Networks” in connection with the consideration of the case in the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n
\n * Reimbursement of expenses for legal assistance is one of the fundamental principles of civil proceedings.
\n * The amount of expenses for legal assistance must be commensurate with the complexity of the case, the scope of services provided, and the price of the claim.
\n * The party requesting reimbursement must
\nthat the plaintiff, as the heir, has the right to receive the unpaid pension that was accrued during the lifetime of her deceased husband. The court referred to Article 52 of the Law of Ukraine “On Mandatory State Pension Insurance,” which regulates the procedure for paying the amount of pension due to the pensioner and remaining unpaid due to their death to family members who lived with the pensioner until the day of their death. These amounts are included in the inheritance. The court also referred to Article 1227 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, which states that the amounts of salary, pension, alimony, scholarships, and other social payments that were due to the testator but not received by them during their lifetime are included in the inheritance.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the actions of the private enforcement officer regarding the distribution of funds received from the sale of property in the enforcement proceedings.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the invalidation of decisions of the general meeting of participants of a limited liability company.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the collection of debt under a loan agreement.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition of ownership of real estate in the order of inheritance by law.<\/p>\n
\n* The court considers the financial situation of both parties when determining the amount of reimbursement.
\n* The court takes into account the established case law of the Supreme Court regarding the reimbursement of expenses for legal assistance.
\n* Objections to the reimbursement of expenses must be substantiated and not contradict the right to professional legal assistance.
\n* The court assesses the expenses, considering whether they were actually incurred, and assesses their necessity.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against tax assessment notices issued by the Main Department of the State Tax Service in the Mykolaiv Region to Pervomaisky Milk Canning Plant Limited Liability Company.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against tax assessment notices issued by the Main Department of the State Tax Service in the Kirovohrad Region to Sanolta Limited Liability Company.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the recovery in the order of inheritance of the underpaid pension accrued during the lifetime of the plaintiff’s deceased husband.<\/p>\n
\nthat, according to Article 1227 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, the amounts of pension that were due to the testator but were not received by him during his lifetime are transferred to members of his family, and in the absence of such, are included in the estate. The court noted that the right to receive these amounts arises for family members as a result of the indication of the law and the fact of the testator’s death, regardless of the reasons why these amounts were not received during his lifetime. Considering that the plaintiff’s husband during his lifetime challenged the inaction of the pension fund regarding the recalculation of the pension, and the pension amounts remained unreceived due to his death, the court concluded that the plaintiff inherited the right to these amounts. The court of cassation agreed with this conclusion, emphasizing that non-execution of a court decision rendered during the lifetime of the testator does not deprive the heir of the right to receive these amounts. Also, the court of cassation noted that the provisions of the Law of Ukraine “On Pension Provision for Persons Dismissed from Military Service, and Certain Other Persons” do not limit the right to receive pension amounts, but only determine the procedure for their payment to family members or inclusion in the estate.<\/p>\n
\nThere is a claim of PERSON_1 against the state of Ukraine for compensation of material and moral damages, caused, in his opinion, by the illegal ruling of the Halytskyi District Court of Lviv.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute in the case is the prosecutor’s appeal against the legality of the transfer by the Kyiv City Council to a private enterprise of a land plot of communal ownership, on which a non-residential building belonging to this enterprise is located, for lease.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition of an additional agreement to the procurement contract as invalid and the recovery of unreasonably received funds.<\/p>\n
\nof the state, having notified the Council of the violation. The court rejected the arguments of FOP (Individual Entrepreneur) Shevchuk V.M. that the expert opinion of the Cherkasy CCI (Chamber of Commerce and Industry) confirms price fluctuations, since the complainant did not indicate which specific conclusions of the Supreme Court the decision of the appellate court contradicts. The court of cassation instance does not have the authority to re-evaluate evidence and establish the circumstances of the case, and therefore left the decision of the appellate court unchanged.<\/p>\n
\nof combat operations, as determined by the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. It was also not established whether the plaintiff was involved in the performance of combat tasks as part of the military command bodies included in the active troop formations. In addition, the courts did not examine the content of the documents based on which the plaintiff was issued a certificate of direct participation in measures to defend Ukraine, namely the orders of the commander of the operational-tactical group and the military unit. The court emphasized that for the correct resolution of the dispute, it is necessary to establish what specific tasks, based on which orders and where exactly the serviceman performed, and how this is confirmed. The court indicated that the courts of previous instances did not assess all the evidence in the aggregate, but limited themselves only to stating the absence of certain documents.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the order to deprive a serviceman of additional remuneration and the claim for its accrual and payment.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the decision on the application of an administrative-economic fine for the driver’s lack of necessary documents provided by the legislation on road transport.<\/p>\n
\nthere was no information about the passengers, their explanations, and the video recording did not contain complete information about the circumstances of the inspection. The court emphasized that the transportation of passengers by an individual at their own expense is not the same as transportation for their own needs, when there is no purpose of obtaining income. To apply a fine, it is necessary to prove that the driver was engaged in commercial transportation. The court also noted that the violation by the court of first instance of the deadlines for accepting evidence is not an unconditional basis for overturning court decisions.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the tax notice-decision issued by the Main Directorate of the State Tax Service in the Odesa region regarding the Charitable Foundation “Public Good”.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the decision on the application of an administrative-economic fine for violation of the requirements regarding the transportation of cargo without a protocol of inspection and adaptation of the tachograph.<\/p>\n
\ntransportation for own needs. The court also noted that the conclusions of the Supreme Court, which the defendant referred to in the cassation appeal, are not relevant to this case, as they relate specifically to road carriers. Thus, the courts concluded that the plaintiff is not subject to liability for violations provided for in Article 60 of the Law of Ukraine “On Road Transport”.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the decision of the NBU and the Ministry of Justice regarding the recognition of the ownership structure of the insurance company as non-transparent and the entry of a corresponding mark in the Unified State Register.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the demand of an Italian citizen for the return of his minor child to Italy in accordance with the Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (Hague Convention).<\/p>\n
\nleaving the decisions of the previous instance courts unchanged, denying the plaintiff’s cassation appeal.<\/p>\n